and accommodating strategies. Individual differences, including risk-aversion and integrative
receiving less than satisfactory outcomes reduces perceptions of fairness (Colquitt, 2001; Lind & Tyler,
To date, limited
generally increase
salary negotiation ,
& Stayn, 2006; O’Shea & Bush, 2002) and that men receive larger salary negotiation payoffs (Gerhart
& Rynes, 1991). ,
looking beyond g
more benefits tha l
differences are re ,
Journal of Organizational Behavior
J. Organiz. Behav. 32, 371–394 (2011)
Published online 20 November 2009 in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/job.671*Correspondence to: Michelle Marks, School of Management, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, 5F5, Fairfax,
VA 22030, U.S.A. E-mail: mmarks@gmu.eduCopyright # 2009A more detailed study of individual differences and choice of negotiation strategy
ender effects, should give us a broader understanding of why certain individuals reap
n others in salary negotiation. Despite a call to ‘‘look further at how individua
lated to process features that determine bargaining outcomes’’ (Barry & Friedmanfield research on salary negotiation has found that those who choose to negotiate
their salaries. The few studies in this area have examined the effect of gender on
outcomes, finding that women are less likely to negotiate (Babcock, Gelfand, Small1988), which produce beliefs that one is not being compensated appropriately for contributions they
bring to an organization (Porter, Conlon, & Barber, 2004).attitudes, played a significant role in predicting whether or not individuals negotiated, and if so,
what strategies they used. Copyright # 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Introduction
Starting salary inequities can have a compounding effect on individuals’ career earnings. For example,
assuming a 5 per cent pay increase each year over a 40 year career, a twenty five year old employee that
starts at $50 000 would earn $634 198 less than an employee starting at $55 000 by the time s/he
reached the age of 65. In addition to the financial implications of a lower starting salary, the perceptual
outcomes of the salary negotiation process are meaningful. The justice literature indicates thatWho asks and who receives in
salary negotiation
MICHELLE MARKS1* AND CRYSTAL HAROLD2
1School of Management, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, U.S.A.
2Fox School of Business, Temple University, Philadelphia, U.S.A.
Summary The influence of individual differences and negotiation strategies on starting salary outcomes
was investigated. A sample of 149 newly hired employees in various industry settings
participated in this study. Results indicated that those who chose to negotiate increased their
starting salaries by an average of $5000. Individuals who negotiated by using competing and
collaborating strategies, characterized by an open discussion of one’s positions, issues, and
perspectives, further increased their salaries as compared to those who used compromisingJohn Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 14 October 2008
Revised 1 October 2009
Accepted 5 October 2009

1998: p. 357), we know little about how individual differences and choice of negotiation strategies
Findings have been drawn primarily from laboratory research, through the use of simulated bargaining
es
m
negotiation researchers to test their findings in field settings. Recent studies (e.g., Van Kleef, De Dreu &
372 M. MARKS AND C. HAROLDManstead, 2004) highlight the importance of emotion in negotiation and raise questions about the
ability of simulations to duplicate the full emotional tensions and ego involvement that are present in
real world negotiations with tangible outcomes, such as salary, at stake.
The few studies (e.g., Babcock et al., 2006; Gerhart & Rynes, 1991; O’Shea & Bush, 2002) on salary
negotiation, examine the link between structural factors and gender with one’s decision to negotiate and hard
salary outcomes. Gerhart and Rynes (1991) provide the first empirical study of evidence that propensity to
negotiate leads to a salary payoff. They surveyed graduating MBA students to examine structural (i.e.,
number of alternative job offers, attractiveness of initial offer) and individual (i.e., gender) determinants of
negotiation propensity (e.g., whether or not an individual chose to negotiate) and bargaining payoff (i.e.,
starting salary). They found that negotiations were more likely when initial salary offers were low, and when
the number and attractiveness of alternative job offers was high. Gender differences did not significantly
predict propensity to negotiate, but among those who negotiated, men negotiated larger payoffs.
O’Shea and Bush (2002) surveyed recent college graduates on a variety of structural factors that affect
salary negotiation outcomes. They found that applicants given the option to present their salary needs were
more likely to negotiate than those who were not, and those who had prior work experience were more
likely to negotiate than those who did not. Consistent with Gerhart and Rynes’ findings, they found that
womenwere no less likely to negotiate, yet in contrast to Gerhart and Rynes, womenwere as successful as
men in salary negotiations. Neither O’Shea and Bush (2002) nor Gerhart and Rynes (1991) focused
directly on strategies used during negotiations. Instead they compared structural factors (e.g., alternative
offers) on decisions to negotiate and financial outcomes of negotiation.While this is an important first step,
it takes a ‘‘black box’’ approach, linking contextual inputs to negotiation outcomes without examining the
role of the negotiation process itself. Further, early studies examined only the reported negotiated salaries,
without consideration of the role of perceptions of fairness and satisfaction with negotiation process.
Perceptions of fairness during the negotiation process may play a pivotal role in forming job attitudes such
as job satisfaction and commitment, which affect job behaviors such as performance and turnover.
The purpose of this study is to propose and test an input-process-outcome model of the salary
negotiations process using two field samples of salary negotiations from business and academia. We
examine relationships between individual differences, job negotiation strategies, and salary negotiation
outcomes (increased starting salary, reactions to job offers). Figure 1 illustrates the model we examine
in this study. Our primary thesis is that individual differences influence one’s choice of whether and
how negotiation strategies are employed, above and beyond contextual factors. We also argue that the
type of negotiation strategy employed predicts important salary negotiation outcomes, including salary
increases and individuals’ reactions to negotiated outcomes.
Negotiation Strategies
The negotiation process is the interaction that occurs between parties before a final outcome is reached
(Thompson, 1990). We refer to a job applicant’s negotiation strategy as a broad, general plan of actionscenarios and role-play methodology. The strength of this body of controlled experimental research li
in the precise manipulation of a small number of factors. Yet there have been frequent calls froaffect important outcomes for new employees.
There is a large body of research on general negotiation practices supporting the notion that effective
negotiation can yield better outcomes for involved parties (Lewicki, Barry, Saunders, &Minton, 2004).Copyright # 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 32, 371–394 (2011)
DOI: 10.1002/job